Section 18A(1)(a) of the SC/ST Act mandates the immediate registration of an FIR upon disclosure of cognizable offences, rendering preliminary inquiries illegal and void, particularly when conducted by an officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.

ORDER :

L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Preface:

The present petition raises an issue of considerable statutory importance under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, specifically the statutory bar on preliminary inquiry under Section 18A(1)(a). The petitioner, belonging to a Scheduled Caste community and serving as Administrative Trustee of a temple, alleges creation of forged documents and caste abuse. Instead of registering an FIR, the police issued two separate closure reports, one by the Inspector of Police and one by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, prompting the petitioner to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.

Facts of the case:

2. The petitioner is the Administrative Trustee of Ayyanar Kovil, situated at Erukkalainatham Village, Madurai District. The temple owns immovable property in Survey No.8/1, 8/5 measuring 2 acres and 83 cents situation in Erukkalainatham Village, Madurai District. According to the petitioner, third parties created forged sale deeds bearing Document Nos. 4945/2008 dated 14.12.2008 and 3783/2021 dated 18.08.2021 and alienated property belonging to the temple.

3. Aggrieved by the alleged forgery and caste abuse, the petitioner lodged a written complaint on 27.09.2025 before the third respondent. No action was taken. Thereafter, a further representation was submitted to the second respondent on 29.07.2025, which also remained unattended. Subsequently, on 30.09.2025, the petitioner escalated the matter to the Superintendent of Police. It is stated that the petitioner has also filed Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2022, seeking a direction for registration of FIR, which is still pending.

4. Meanwhile, the third respondent conducted an inquiry and passed an order dated nil, closing the complaint. The petitioner challenges the said order on multiple grounds including lack of jurisdiction, violation of Rule 7 of the SC/ST Rules, and illegality under Section 18A(1)(a) of the Act.

Submissions on either side:

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended:

(a) The Inspector of Police (third respondent) is not competent to conduct inquiry in respect of offences alleged under the SC/ST Act. Under Rule 7, investigation must be conducted only by a Deputy Superintendent of Police.

(b) The complaint clearly disclosed cognizable offences, particularly caste abuse coupled with forgery relating to temple property. Hence, registration of FIR was mandatory in terms of Section 154 CrPC and Section 18A(1)(a) of the SC/ST Act.

(c) The third respondent’s act of conducting a preliminary inquiry violates the explicit statutory prohibition under Section 18A(1)(a), inserted by Amendment Act 27 of 2018.

(d) Reliance is placed upon Union of India v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2019 SC 4917 and Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P., (2014) 2 SCC 1 and the recent decision of this Court in Muniraj v. State, 2025 (2) MWN (Cr.) 631 where preliminary inquiries in SC/ST complaints were held to be illegal.

6. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate produced the proceedings of the second respondent dated 22.11.2025, in Reference No.337/Camp/DSP/OMK/MD, showing inquiries conducted on 26.11.2025, 28.11.2025, and 03.12.2025, and submitted that, the matter is a civil dispute. As per the report of the DSP, on 22.11.2025, the investigation has been conducted and the same was closed as civil in nature, by advising the respective parties to approach the concerned civil court. During the course of inquiry, it is clearly revealed that the individuals mentioned in the petition were not present at the place of occurrence and were residing in another district. To substantiate the same, the individual persons have also given statements in this regard, that no such incident had taken place and that the complaint of the petitioner was closed as “false”. Therefore, he contended that no relief may be granted.

Analysis:

7. Section 18A(1)(a) of the SC/ST Act, inserted by the 2018 amendment, reads:

“No preliminary enquiry shall be re